396. Telegram From the Embassy in the Philippines to the Department of State1

2469. Reference 2375.2 Since my return3 it has become apparent that the question of a preliminary confidential exchange on bases matter as envisaged during my visit to Washington may be more difficult than anticipated at that time. I am not referring to the possibilities of any substantive agreement, particularly the central issue of jurisdiction which has always been doubtful to say the least as was brought out during the Washington consultations, but rather the mere mechanics of any form of consultation in present circumstances.

As originally proposed by Serrano to me last November (Embtel 1858)4 this confidential exchange was to take place in Washington under cover of Serrano’s return to the US as chairman of the Philippine Delegation to the UN. Subsequently, however, Garcia reversed himself and vetoed Serrano’s trip to the US. The reasons for this action are not completely clear (and Serrano shows an understandable reluctance to discuss it) but it seems in part at least to have resulted from a leak to the press here in Manila that Serrano was to undertake in Washington discussions on the bases issue.5 In all probability this aroused opposition from members of the Philippine panel and other politicians which Garcia was unwilling to face and preferred to abandon the idea. The very fact of the transfer of the locus from Washington to Manila itself rendered more unlikely the possibility of a genuinely confidential exchange of views. This impression has been reinforced by the publicity which the possibility of resumption of bases negotiations has received in the Philippine press since my return. Although I have made no proposals or any suggestions since my [Page 826] return, only confirming with Serrano at the inaugural reception that such exchanges were to take place following the appointment of the new Cabinet,6 the fact of my return has brought forth a spate of speculation and comment in the press which has tended to develop into an argument concerning method of negotiation. As a result a number of politicians, Paredes, Primicias and Delgado,7 have come out publicly for the panel method as against the use of diplomatic channels as allegedly proposed by the American Ambassador and one paper, The Philippine Herald, has quoted Garcia in a personal interview as in favor of panel discussions. In this public speculation the distinction between confidential preliminary exchanges and substantive formal negotiations has become blurred and the foreign office has done nothing to clarify the matter.

Tuesday8 during a call on Serrano on another subject I mentioned to him my concern at the publicity that had been given to this matter and inquired whether he felt that it would be possible in the circumstances to have genuinely confidential exploratory talks for the purpose he had suggested to me last October. Serrano said he had not discussed the matter recently with the President and would not do so until his appointment is official, but that insofar as he is aware it was still the intention that he and I would have this confidential exchange. As to publicity he said that he had always thought it would be necessary at some point in these preliminary exchanges to keep the members of the panel informed if we were making any progress in the direction of common ground on the issues involved. He said he had always had in mind a final “rubber stamp” session in which the Philippine panel would be involved. He made it plain, however, that in his view no member of the panel would be involved in the preliminary exchanges.

I told him that I wondered how long any discussions could be kept even reasonably confidential if members of the panel were to be consulted. He said he did not have in mind consulting them at the very beginning but only in the event that some possibility of agreement emerged.

In general I feel that the atmosphere is not propitious and despite Serrano’s optimism on this point I personally doubt if it would be possible to conduct preliminary conversations with him in any degree of privacy or confidence and I feel that even such conversations as envisaged may revive the whole bases issue and throw it into the realm of political controversy with no profit to either side. As matters now stand I do not intend to discuss this matter any further with [Page 827] Serrano but will await word from him following the appointment of the new Cabinet. I feel it would be a tactical error for us to exhibit any particular eagerness or anxiety to renew discussions on the bases issue.

We shall follow the situation here with the closest attention and submit any recommendations for dealing with it in the event of necessity prior to the actual beginning of any discussion.

Bohlen
  1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, 711.56396/1-958. Secret; Limit Distribution. Repeated to CINCPAC.
  2. In telegram 2375 from Manila, January 2, Bohlen reported that he had learned in strictest confidence that Felixberto Serrano would be Foreign Secretary in the new cabinet. (Ibid., 711.56396/1–258)
  3. Bohlen had been in Washington for consultation.
  4. In telegram 1858 from Manila, November 15, 1957, Bohlen referred to his discussion with Serrano on the procedure of confidential exploratory talks on issues relating to U.S. bases in the Philippines. (Department of State, Central Files, 711.56396/11–1557)
  5. From July to December 1956, Karl R. Bendetsen, U.S. Special Representative for Philippine Base Matters, negotiated with a Philippine panel led by Senator Emanuel Pelaez. These negotiations, difficult from the start, finally deadlocked over the issue of criminal jurisdiction. Other unresolved issues included the extent of U.S. involvement in case of enemy attack on the Philippines; the duration of military agreements between the two countries, particularly the agreement on the bases; the acquisition and relinquishment of U.S. base lands in the Philippines; customs and immigration control; and mining and fishing rights on the bases. Both countries expected base negotiations to be resumed, and discussions within the U.S. Government were continuous.
  6. The announcement of the new Cabinet was not made until March.
  7. Lucas Paredes, Congressman; Cipriano Primicias, Senate Majority Floor Leader; Francisco Delgado, Senator and Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
  8. January 7.